Perioperative management of antithrombotics in elective intracranial procedures: systematic review, critical appraisal

PURPOSE

Perioperative management of patients medicated with antithrombotics requiring elective intracranial procedures is challenging. We ought to (1) identify the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and recommendations (CPRs) on perioperative management of antithrombotic agents in elective intracranial surgery and (2) assess their methodological quality and reporting clarity.

METHODS

The study was conducted following the 2020 PRISMA guidelines for a systematic review and has been registered (PROSPERO, CRD42023415710). An electronic search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar. The search terms used were "adults," "antiplatelets," "anticoagulants," "guidelines," "recommendations," "english language," "cranial surgery," "brain surgery," "risk of bleeding," "risk of coagulation," and "perioperative management" in all possible combinations. The search period extended from 1964 to April 2023 and was limited to literature published in the English language. The eligible studies were evaluated by three blinded raters, by employing the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II (AGREE-II) analysis tool.

RESULTS

A total of 14 sets of guidelines were evaluated. Two guidelines from the European Society of Anaesthesiology and one from the American College of Chest Physicians found to have the highest methodological quality and reporting clarity according to the AGREE-II tool. The interrater agreement was good with a mean Cohens Kappa of 0.70 (range, 46.5-94.4%) in the current analysis.

CONCLUSION

The perioperative management of antithrombotics in intracranial procedures may be challenging, complex, and demanding. Due to the lack of high quality data, uncertainty remains regarding the optimal practices to balance the risk of thromboembolism against that of bleeding.

Critical Assessment of the Guidelines-Based Management of Severe Traumatic Brain Injury with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II

BACKGROUND

Severe traumatic brain injury constitutes a clinical entity with complex underlying pathophysiology. Management of patients with severe traumatic brain injury is guided by Clinical Practice Guidelines and Consensus Statements (CPG and CS). The published CPG and CS vary in quality, comprehensiveness, and clinical applicability. The value of critically assessing CPG and CS cannot be overemphasized. The aim of our study was to assess the quality of the published CPG and CS, based on the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science focusing on guidelines and consensi about severe traumatic brain injury . The search terms used were "traumatic brain injury," "TBI," "brain injury," "cerebral trauma," "head trauma," "closed head injury," "head injury," "guidelines," "recommendations," "consensus" in any possible combination. The search period extended from 1964 to 2021 and was limited to literature published in English. The eligible studies were scored by 4 raters, using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument. The inter-rater agreement was assessed using the Cronbach's alpha.

RESULTS

Twelve CPG and CS were assessed. Overall, the study by Carney et al. was the most Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II compliant study. In general, the domains of clarity of presentation, and scope and purpose, achieved the highest scores. The lowest inter-rater agreement in our analysis was "fair."

CONCLUSIONS

The purpose of our study for assessing the quality of CPG and CS was served. We present the strong and weak points of CPG and CS. Our findings support the idea of periodically updating guidelines and improving their rigor of development.

Hemispherotomy Revised: A complication overview and a systematic review meta-analysis

Introduction

Hemispherectomy/hemispherotomy has been employed in the management of catastrophic epilepsy. However, initial reports on the associated mortality and morbidity raised several concerns regarding the technique's safety. Their actual, current incidence needs to be systematically examined to redefine hemispherotomy's exact role.

Research question

Our current study examined their incidence and evaluated the association of the various hemispherotomy surgical techniques with the reported complications.

Material & methods

A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science until December 2022. Fixed- and random-effects models were employed. Egger's regression test was used for estimating the publication bias, while subgroup analysis was utilized for defining the role of the different hemispherotomy techniques.

Results

We retrieved a total of 37 studies. The overall procedure mortality was 5%, with a reported mortality of 7% for hemispherectomy and 3% for hemispherotomy. The reported mortality has decreased over the last 30 years from 32% to 2%. Among the observed post-operative complications aseptic meningitis and/or fever occurred in 33%. Hydrocephalus requiring a shunt insertion occurred in 16%. Hematoma evacuation was necessary in 8%, while subgaleal effusion in another 8%. Infections occurred in 11%. A novel post-operative cranial nerve deficit occurred in 11%, while blood transfusion was necessary in 28% of the cases.

Discussion and conclusion

Our current analysis demonstrated that the evolution from hemispherectomy to hemispherotomy along with neuroanesthesia advances, had a tremendous impact on the associated mortality and morbidity. Hemispherotomy constitutes a safe surgical procedure in the management of catastrophic epilepsies.